1

REPORTABLE

IN THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA

CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION

CRIMINAL APPEAL NO. 1969 OF 2009

Ajitsingh Harnamsingh Gujral

..

Appellant

-versus-

State of Maharashtra

..

Respondent

J U D G M E N T

MARKANDEY KATJU, J.

“Qareeb hai yaaron roz-e-

mahshar,

Chupega kushton ka khoon

kyonkar,

Jo chup rahegi zubaan-e-

khanjar,

Lahu pukaaregaa aasteen

ka”

- Ameer Minai

2

1.

Heard Shri Jaspal Singh, learned senior counsel for the

appellant and learned counsel for the State of Maharashtra for the

respondent. This is an appeal by special leave against the

judgment of the Bombay High Court dated 26.6.2006, which has

confirmed the death sentence of the appellant given by the learned

Sessions Judge dated 19.3.2005.

2.

The accused is a businessman. He was a married man having

one son and two daughters. He was married with the deceased

Kanwaljeet Kaur about 25 to 27 years prior to the incident dated

10.4.2003. He had a son Amandeep Singh aged about 20 years

and two daughters viz. Neeti and Taniya, aged about 22 years and

13 years respectively. All of them were allegedly killed by the

accused in the early hours of the morning of 10.4.2003 by pouring

petrol on their persons and setting them on fire.

3.

Earlier the accused had lived at Ludhiana. However, it

appears that he suffered business losses there, and so he shifted to

3

Mumbai with his family and started residing in Jyotsna Building.

Initially he was doing business of catering in the same building,

and his son Amandeepsingh was assisting him in that business.

After some time, the accused shifted his catering business to

Kamlesh building which is situated in the same locality of Shere-

Punjab colony, Andheri. There were several employees of the

accused to assist him in the business of catering. Those servants

used to sleep in front of his flat in the verandah. The accused was

having a Maruti Zen Car and his son was having a motorcycle.

4.

According to the prosecution, the accused was a hot

tempered man. He was like a dictator in the family, and dominated

his wife and children in the family, on account of which there was

resentment in his family members. Further, it is alleged by the

prosecution that the accused was ill-treating his wife and twice he

had assaulted her with a leather belt.

5.

On the night of 9.4.2003 the accused and all his family

members were in their flat. All the servants were sleeping outside.

4

The accused was seen coming to the flat between the night of

9.4.2003 and 10.4.2003 at about midnight. There were two bed

rooms in the flat of the accused. Ordinarily the accused and his

wife used to sleep in one bed room while the children slept in

another. There was a quarrel on the night of 9.4.2003 between the

accused and his wife after he had returned back from work.

Between 4.00 and 4.30 a.m. some of the servants heard a big noise

of something bursting followed by or preceded by someone crying

in pain. The servants woke up and found that the flat of the

accused was on fire. There was utter confusion and chaos.

Somebody phoned to the fire brigade and a fire engine came. The

police also followed. The door of the flat was open, and it was

smoky inside. Strong smell of petrol was coming from there. The

fire was extinguished, and then only could they enter the bed room,

where the four bodies of the members of the family of the accused

viz. his wife, his son and two daughters were found burnt, and they

were dead. The police made an inquiry from the servants and then

a report of murder was lodged by PSI Prakash Shivram Kamble.

5

The investigation soon started and inquest Panchanama, spot

panchanama etc. were made. The bodies were then sent for post

mortem.

6.

In their preliminary inquiry, the police found that the Maruti

Zen car of the accused was not there and the accused was also not

there. Attempts were